ESPN NFL

Posted by ESPN.com's Mike Sando

Chad from Seattle writes: I am curious why I can't find anyone on any of the major sport's websites that talk about James Harrison's cheap shot he took on the punt in the 3rd quarter. Just like Madden stated, he should have been thrown out of the game. It kinda bothers me all he is getting seems to be praise when the cameras clearly caught him throwing an elbow at a guy down on his knees then taking a cheap shot when the Cardinal tried to get back on his feet. What are your thoughts about that play?

Mike Sando: My initial reaction was that officials should have ejected Harrison. Upon watching the replay, I saw Aaron Francisco dive into Harrison's legs at the beginning of the play. The camera angle was not a great one, but clearly Harrison felt as though Francisco was taking a cheap shot at his knees in an attempt to injure.

More likely, Francisco was trying to figure out the best way to match up against a far stronger athlete. I'm not sure how Francisco, a safety, was going to block Harrison without going low. Harrison took offense and roughed up Francisco. I would have understood if the officials had ejected Harrison. I can also understand why Harrison would be upset after a player dove into his knees.

Chris from Buckeye, Ariz., writes: I have not seen anyone address the card's greatest off-season need: better safeties. Find me a play in the past 3 years down the field and I'll show you Aaron Francisco running in 2 seconds too late. And while Wilson is a heart-and-soul guy, and a good blitzer, he is not a very good safety. He takes bad angles, gives up on plays, and has gone from a little underrated to very overrated. I'd let Wilson walk if it meant locking up Boldin and Dockett and Dansby long term. Wilson's a sentimental fan favorite (Francisco, not), but I think his liabilities outweigh his benefits. Did we hear his name once during the SB? Did he make any plays at all?

Mike Sando: Wilson had two sacks and a forced fumble in the NFC Championship Game, and he earned a Pro Bowl berth this season. The Cardinals would be better off if they had more players like him. Having a safety with a linebacker's mentality will carry risks in the passing game, one reason I think the Cardinals need another cover cornerback.

Antrel Rolle made a pretty smooth transition to free safety. The Cardinals could stand to upgrade their secondary beyond the top three players back there (Wilson, Rolle, Dominique Rodgers-Cromartie). They will certainly change up some of the personnel there.

Cameron from Pittsburgh writes: Sando, why do you have to say that Warner "deserved" a better ending, or another play? He deserves whatever he works for. The crew reviewed the play and it was indisputable that he fumbled. End of story. Warner has a great story, but in this case didn't deserve the extra review, because it would have been a fumble and Pittsburgh's ball anyways.

Mike Sando: Yeah, I didn't care for the word "deserved" in the headline. I wrote the headline but did not like it. Sometimes that happens when you're hurrying to file a column on deadline after midnight. But I do think the replay official should have initiated a review.

Adam from Mesa writes: Mike one more thought for today, what would Julius Peppers look like in a Cardinals uniform? He wants to go to a 3-4 defense, and the Cardinals play a hybrid version with the Predator position usually being played by Travis LaBoy, a position that phases between a down 3 technique and an upright 2 technique and plays on either side. Imagine the havoc he would cause in our system. The one obstacle, what would the Cardinals have to give to get him, assuming Carolina franchises him.

Mike Sando: Franchising Peppers would produce a salary-cap charge north of $16 million. Would the organization be willing to carry that type of number for a player who has said he wants out? I do think Peppers would look good in a Cardinals uniform, but Arizona needs to take care of its own guys first, and that is going to be hard enough, most likely.

John from Tempe writes: Mike, I was at the game and have yet to see an entire game replay. Since you have had a chance to slow the game down and watch every play, I wanted to get your honest opinion on a couple of items: 1. Did Harrison actually score a TD or was his helmet or shoulder down before the ball cross the line? 2. Was Warner's arm moving forward on the last play of the game (should it have been ruled incomplete)? 3. Am I the only one who noticed that neither Rooney nor Tomlin congratulated or even acknowledged their opponent during the trophy presentation? Thanks for all the good work. Keep it up. -John

Mike Sando: Thanks, John. I did think Harrison scored on the return. I could not tell for sure if Warner fumbled or threw incomplete, but he was definitely attempting to throw the ball. It just comes down to the exact moment the ball came out. Tough call. I did not watch the postgame ceremony, so I'm not sure on that part.

Brian from Latrobe writes: Breaking down Harrison's interception return : what about fitz running out of bounds?

Mike Sando: Larry Fitzgerald did run out of bounds while chasing Harrison. The rule states than an offensive player cannot be the first person to touch the ball after stepping out of bounds. I think Fitzgerald was OK coming back inbounds to make the tackle. The real problem was that he ran into Rolle, who was standing too close to the field. That's why head coaches routinely tell their players along the sideline to back up.

Chad from Oshkosh writes: Sando, Now that Arizona is unofficially eliminated from next year's playoffs because they lost the super bowl, which team would you pick right now to win the division next year? You can't pick Arizona.

Mike Sando: If not Arizona, Seattle. Second-best QB in the division.

Adam from Mesa writes: Morning Mike Quick thought, though it all depends on Warner and NOT retiring, If Haley goes to KC, could Leinart go with him? Could we work out a trade of Leinart for Tony Gonzalez, who voiced his desire to go to a contender and a chance at a Super Bowl. Imagine an offense comprising Warner, Fitzgerald, Boldin, Breaston, and Gonzalez!!! This also gives the new regime a chance to groom their own quarterback instead of the one they inherited from Denny Green. It also give's Leinart a chance to start in the NFL. What do you think?

Mike Sando: That would assume Haley would want to go in such a direction. I'm not sure what he thinks of Leinart, but I do think the Cardinals need to have a viable backup given Warner's age.

Justin from York, Pa., writes: Everyone is talking
about the fumble call but I think the call that wasn't made against Holmes' celebration was just as costly and not a question. He used the ball as a prop on his celebration which would've given the Cards and extra 15 yards on the kick-off maybe then resulting on a shorter hail mary play that then would not have needed as much time for Warner to "fumble" it. Whats your thoughts on that non-call for an obvious excessive celebration?

Mike Sando: Yes, I'm aware of that potential missed call. Frankly, though, I dislike those types of penalties, particularly in key situations. Holmes caught the go-ahead TD pass in the final minute of the Super Bowl. He should be able to cut loose. That said, the officials did honor the letter of the law in other cases, notably the chop-block penalty against Edgerrin James, a call that basically killed a Cardinals drive.

Dan from Seattle writes: Hey Mike, The most obvious question regarding the Hawks this offseason is a two part question. Will they do what it takes to resign Hill and what will they do with the #4 pick. Also, do you see them resigning Engram? And finally, Do you see them going after any other free agents at this time from other teams? thanks.

Mike Sando: With new coaches, the Seahawks would still be evaluating their personnel options. I could see Leroy Hill testing the market. I do not have a good feel for the No. 4 overall pick at this time. Perhaps that changes at the combine. Re-signing Engram makes sense. The team needs numbers at the position.

Tim from Pittsburgh writes: Get over it Mike -- it was a fumble. You're carrying your whining from the Seahawks loss over to this game. Can you spell Jealous? Just like all fans who wished they belonged to the Steeler Nation.

Mike Sando: The funny thing about Super Bowl XL was that I had no idea the officiating would become an issue after the game. Sure, there were a couple of sketchy calls, but the Seahawks made enough mistakes to lose that game on their own. My focus was on that aspect of the game. The officiating angle took on another life a day or so later. I probably should have focused on it more coming out of the game, but Jerramy Stevens' dropped passes and lapses in the Seattle secondary were the Seahawks' biggest problems that night. In this game, I don't see what harm a review would have done. Better safe than sorry.

Terry from parts unknown writes: This non call stuff people are saying Mike, bottom line, why are the Cardinals the crusaders for justice, now? They did not say anything after a truly blatant call in against the Eagles (pass interference remember, they darn near tackled they guy before the ball came at the end of the game, in which case THEY may not have been in the SB in the first place). Is there a rule about that call anyway, see "tuck" rule, as a matter of fact, twice. And besides, that has absolutely nothing to do with the fact the Arizona Cardinals let the other team drive down the field with 2 minutes to go and score. Nothing.

Mike Sando: And I suspect that is why the Cardinals aren't complaining too loudly. The Steelers are worthy champions. Independent of that, officials should have reviewed the Cardinals' final offensive play, in my view.

John from Great Falls writes: Well, Mike. First off congratulations on a good year of covering the NFC West. Now, about the Super Bowl. I thought it was a great game and that both teams played their hearts out. All in all, it was a stellar game and truly super. However, I've heard many people on message boards claiming that the refs let the Steelers win by making calls in their favor. What are your thoughts on this? The only call I found questionable was the "Roughing" the Passer call on Dansby. Other then that there really were not any game-changing calls or missed calls that pulled in favor of the Steelers. Just wondering about your thoughts on this. Thank you for your time.

Mike Sando: I didn't think officiating swung the outcome. I wasn't a big fan of the chop-block call, and I thought the roughing call against Karlos Dansby was a little ticky-tack. But when the opposing team takes the ball down the field and scores the winning touchdown in the final seconds, that team deserves our respect. The Steelers did that. Hats off to them.